Oldalképek
PDF
ePub
[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]

1786.

Anecdotes of Voltaire.

both through its own merit, and the admirable performance of Mademoifelle Dumefnil. What would you fay (writes Voltaire in "one of his letters) to an actress who drew tears from the audience during three fuc"ceffive acts? The auditors gave me all the "credit for the exquifite pleasure they re❝ceived: part of it was due to the per"formers. The enthufiafm of the pit was "so extravagant, that they demanded to fee "me, in the moft clamorous manner; I "was carried foriably into the box belong"ing to the lady Marefchal Villars, who was there with her daughter-in-law. The audience were frantic, they called out for the Duchefs de Villars to kifs me, and "made so much noife, fhe was obliged to "comply, by order of her mother-in-law. "I was kiffed in public, as Alain Chartier "was by the Princess Margaret of Scotland; but he was afleep, and I was wide awake." This enthufiafni of the public transported Voltaire; he was pleaied as a child with fo much celebrity; nor did he conceal the fatisfaction he felt. It even hindered him from fleeping. Letters from a Prince or a Minifter have fometimes deprived him of reft, and difturbed the repofe of his retreat; which ought to have been the retreat of a philofopher.

357 who had neither business nor other diverfion and who had but that resource.

He was more fond of being admitted into foreign Academies than thofe of France, and was particularly vain of the title of Fellow of the Royal Society of London. He was alfo a member of feveral Italian Academies. That of the Arcades, which is one of the moft celebrated, being defirous to diftinguish Voltaire, gave him the furname of Museo, meaning the Poet; or, The favourite of the Mufes.

The library of Voltaire was neither fo numerous nor aried as his fortune and the extent of his knowledge feemed to require, He thought we ought to fet bounds to our reading, and that when we had feen a certain number of authors we had feen them all.

Voltaire ufed to relate, as an inftance of the bewitching nature of gaming, that he had known an old woman formerly addicted to play, and extremely indigent, who used to make broth for fome other poor players, for the fake of being permitted to look on.

Critical cenfures generally rendered him peevish, and he feldom replied to them but by repartee.Fontenelle, after the firft reprefentation of Oedipus, faid to the author, fome previous compliments having been paid: "I could with your verfe were not quite fo pompous, it would be more eafy and flowing, and better fuited to tragedy." "Sir, replied Voltaire, That is a fault I intend to correct, and with that view will go and read your Paftorals.'

66

Voltaire could ill accommodate himself to
that extreme trifling which predominates fo"
continually in the converfation of women.
Happening orice to be in company with fome
very elegant ladies, or who believed them.
felves fuch at leaft, after having difcuffed all
the topics of the moment, they began to
talk of their dress, and entered minutely in-
to the merits of each others caps and ribe
bands. One among them remarked, that
Madame de *** had a pair of fhoes most
exquifitely elegant: Pray, Madam (faid
"the) who is your fhoemaker? He is a di-
"vineman!-An unparalelled!"-Voltaire,
who was prefent, at laf began to lofe his
patience, and faid with fome peevishness,
*Indeed, ladies, you talk in a very extra
"traordinary style, A fhoemaker an un-
"paraleled man! What terms would you
employ to speak of the greatest man in
"the nation?" Voltaire has extremely well
defcribed the manners of the greater part of
women in his Vue de l'aris & de Versailles, in
which, he fays, they-——

In feeming raptures altogether,
Tattle of fermons, cards, and weather;
Exhauft their lab'ring fouls with laws,
To regulate the price of gauze,
What colours match beft, blue or pink,
And fing because they cannot think.
All kinds of games, except chefs, appear-
ed to him very infipid. He acknowledged
thefe inventions abfolutely neceffary for those

As to languages, he understood Latin, English, and Italian. He knew but little of Greek, nothing of Hebrew, and was but moderately acquainted with the Spanish. French, however, he understood perfectly, and was mafter of all its niceties, as fufficiently appeared by his converfation and writings. He had likewise bestowed confiderable attention to etymology, being well convinced, that this fpecies of learning, when neither arbitrary nor chimerical, is highly neceffary to an accurate knowledge and proper ufe of words.

As a fpecimen of the converfation of Voltaire, we add the following Dialogue:

A Converfation between M. de Voltaire and Two Travellers from Avignon.

Vifitors. We were unwilling to pass
through Geneva without feeing the wonder
of the age.
Voltaire. You are very polite,
I am
only a fick old man. May afk you, Gen-
tlemen, if you have travelled far?

Vifitors. We are from Avignon.
Voltaire. You are leaving then, the

Papal

Papal territories for an heretical country, aud what will the inquifition fay? Viitors. Our Inquifition is very mild, it hurts nobody.

Voltaire. It is pity but it should hurt fome of your Printers, who fill all Europe with rhaplodies and fatires.

Vifitors. These works are not known at Avignon; they are printed by, fealth, and circulated in the fame manner.

Voltaire. You have in your city a very amiable man of learning, I mean the Marquis de Chaumont. I have alfo had fome acquaintance with the Abbé de Sade. Is he not publifhing the Memoirs of Petrarch? Vifitors. Yes; the first volume has already appeared in quarto, and will be followed by two others.

Voltaire. Three volumes in quarto, on one man! It is too much.

Vifitors. But he has inferted part of the poetry of Petarch, which he has tranf lated into French verfe.

Voltaire. I would not advise him to tranflate it all. I doubt much whether Petrarch, though a very great man, in the age in which he lived, were equal to our Ricine, or even Quinault. I have formerly attempted to tranflate feveral of his pieces, but I foon perceived he had often more imagination than tafte, and more wit than pathos. Whoever tranflates Petrarch ought to make a felection.

Vifitors. It is probable the Abbe de Sade will make fuch a felection.

Voltaire. You have many Jefuits in your country, have you not?

Visitors. There are fome.

Voltaire. Thofe gentlemen ought not to take advantage of their afylum, to publish all manner of abuse against persons of merit, whom they ought to refpect.

Fifters. Thofe of whom we have any knowledge, for the moft part, are peaceable old men; we do not know that they have written against any one. Perhaps the prefies of Avignon are blamed for what is in reality published at Liege or Bruffels, &c.

An Efay concerning the Souls of Brutes,
Equidem credo quia fit divinitus illis
Ingenium-
VIRGIL

[blocks in formation]

of Almighty regard, and as God is alike the grand parent of all, fo

« He fees with equal eyes, as God of all An hero perish, or a sparrow fall.”‹ Confidering therefore the mutual relation they ftand in to each other, as being equally dependents on the fame common parent, benevolence towards brutes is a duty incumbent on man, cruelty towards them is an higk degree of criminality.

Thus far every one will readily allow, and no one can reasonably object; but there is still one reason, which weighs as much, if not more with me, than any other, in behalf of the brute creation, and that is the confideration of their poffeffing jouls, truly and properly fuch, which muft undoubtedly aggravate our cruelty towards them, and juftly entitles them to much greater refpect than is fhewn them even by the moft benevolent perfons. Now the proofs in fupport of this opinion are many and weighty, the most cogent of which I fhall here adduce and enforce. The first is the power of spontaneous or voluntary moti on, which they poffefs equally with us. Moti on does not always indicate an internal intelligent principle, fpontaneous motion undoubtedly does. Matter, however modified, is of itfelf iuert, and cannot change its fitua tion, or move without fome external impulie, and when put in motion by an external impulfe, it will purfue only one undeviating rectilinear courfe, and that adinfinitum, unjefs ftopped in his career by a body more powerful than itself: now as beafts, birds, &c. move freely, and take any direction whatever, and flop when they please, it is evident they must be actuated by fome intelligent principle, which principle cannot pofibly be material, and must therefore be jpiritual, and if fo immortal, Hence it was that Socrates urged this proof for the immortality of the human foul, that That which moves of itself must be eternal,

Brutes alfo enjoy the feveral fenfes in ge neral to an equal degree with us, and fome to much greater perfection. They are fenfible of pleafure and of pain as we are: this is not the cafe with mere matter; mere matter is fenfible of neither; footh a living dog and he will be fully fenfible of it, and expres his fatisfaction by his grateful fawning; do the fame to a dead one, and the creature will continue juft as fenfible as a ftone, or any other lump of inanimate matter. Where then is this percipient quality in the flesh, the nerves or the blood? In neither, for the dead animal hath all thefe as well as the living one, and yet perceives not. This percipient quality lies then in the foul, and in the foul alone, the fenfes are only the methods

or

1786.

Effay concerning the Souls of Brutes.

or means of conveying the ideas of objects or outward things to the foul.

It is alfo plainly evident that brutes poffefs the faculty of cogitation or thought, elfe whence arife all thofe inftances of furprifing fagacity, and aftonishing contrivance, we meet with in various animals, little, if at all inferior to the powers of human fkill. The beaver, for inftance, is a moft excellent architect; in building his habitation he fhews a moft excellent judgment, and obferves the most exact proportion. The fame may be faid of the bees and the ants, but what is most remarkable in thefe is their forms of government, the firft being monarchical, and the last a republic, both well planned and executed. Now can we fuppofe that thefe creatures are incapable of thinking? If fo, nothing but confufion and difcord would fubfift among fuch large and populous focieties as they form themfelves into, inftead of that excellent and perfect order and regularity we obferve among them; and nothing but ill conftructed dwellings inftead of thofe regular and well contrived edifices which they erect. The faculty of thought then is abfolutely neceffary for the prefervation of peace and good order among them, which are the only fupports of any fociety; and that they poffefs this faculty the above inftances are abundant proofs. The great Huygens, in his curious and entertaining book, entitled Cofmothearos, confidering what animals inhabit the feveral planets, hath the following juft obfervation, "If we do, but confider, fays he, fome forts of beafts, as the dog, the ape, the beaver, the elephant, nay fome birds and bees, what fenfe and understanding they are mafters of, we shall be forced to allow, that man is not the only rational animal. For we difcover fomewhat in them of reafon, independent on, and prior to all teaching and practice.'

I hus judged this great mathematician on this point; and I am persuaded that no one who duly reflects, and seriously confiders the many and weighty proofs which offer on this point, can ingenuously deny rationality to brutes. I fhall now produce a particular inftance or two of the fagacity of brutes, from the benevolent and excellent Plutarch, who, in his Dialogue concerning the Differ ence between terreftrial and aquatic Animals, informs us that "the Thracians, when they were to pafs a frozen river, used to turn a fox loose upon the ice, it being cuftomary with this cautious and cunning beaft to move very warily on fuch dangerous ground, holding his ear towards the ice, fo that if he heard the furface crack, or the water flowing beneath, he might retreat in feason, but if he perceived no danger, he would proceed boldly to the oppofite hore." Now here is,

359

as our author very justly observės, a fyllogiftical conclufion, drawn from premifes. furnished by the fenfes, the fox's chain of reafoning being as follows: "There can be no noife without motion, that which is easily moveable cannot be firmly frozen, water not firmly frozen muft be in a degree fluid, and a fluid cannot fupport an heavier body than itfelf." The fame writer relates the following inftance of fagacity in a dog, of which he himfelf was eye-witnefs. Being once on fhipboard he observed a dog very busy about a jar, that was apparently half full of oil, which the dog in vain endeavoured to reach. However (the feamen being bufily engaged), the creature took up fucceffively a number of ftones, and dropped them one by one into the jar, till the oil arofe high enough in the jar, when he took of it as much as he pleafed. "I was aftonifhed, fays Plutarch, how the dog could poffibly know that the immiffion of heavier substances would cause the lighter fubftance to afcend. Now who will prefume to affert against plain evidence, with Ariftotle, concerning brutes, that They act not by any art, neither do they inquire, neither do they deliberate about what they do?

On the contrary it appears fully evident that they both reafon, and deliberate, from the above general and particular inftances, to which innumerable others might have been added. Certain it is that all brute animals do not equally fhew the fame fagacity and fkill in contrivance, nor do the beft of them carry their fpeculation fo high as we do; but these are no fufficient reasons to deny them rationality. Even among men some are much abler reafoners than others; fome are so naturally ignorant as to know no more of the caufes of the fimpleft things than the inanimate and senseless clod, yet who will deny them to poffefs a rational foul? Few, very few, in a revolution of ages will be found equal to a Newton, or a Locke, yet even a fool, that knows nothing of mathematics or metaphyfics, or scarce even of the common affairs of life, hath a foul, an im- ` material, an immortal foul, as well as the profoundest mathematician or metaphysician. And with regard to the comparison between brutes and us, let it be anfwered that it is more than probable, if our fouls occupied bodies organized no better than theirs, we should speculate or reafon as indifferently as they. Befides, we do not pretend to put the brutes on an equal footing with regard to rationality with mankind, only to prove that they have a degree of rationality, which likewife muft indicate them to poffefs a rational foul, which is farther evinced from the faculty of reminiscence or memory, which they undoubtedly poffefs. Memory is the power of recollecting paft ideas and

eve

events, and that brutes have this power is certain. Whelps, when once burned, will carefully avoid the fire. Dogs and horfes learn to do particular things on hearing certain words pronounced; hounds obey the voice of the huntfman, and the horfe in a team the voice of the drivers: parrots learn to talk, articulate, and fing whole fongs to their proper tunes. If you carry a dog many miles into the country, he will find his way, a year after, to his former habitation. "Birds, faith Mr. Ray, which feed their young in the neft, though in all likelihood they have no ability of counting the number of them, fhall yet (though they bring but one morfel of meat at a time, and have not fewer, it may be, than feven or eight young in the neft together, do all at once, with equal greedinefs, hold up their heads and gape) not omit, or forget one of them, but feed them all; which unless they did carefully obferve, and retain in memory which they had fed, which not, were impoffible to be done.' Wild. of God, page 136. Many particular inftances might also be alledged to prove that brute animals poffefs the faculty of remembrance, and that often times to a furprising degree. Now there can be no reminifcence, or memory, without ideas, and no ideas without thought, nor can there be thought without reasoning, and there cannot be any reasoning without a rational foul. Brutes alfo dream, as Aristotle and Luciretus both affert, and daily experience proves. Dogs are obferved to make imperfect attempts in their fleep at barking and running, and the like is obferved in cats alfo, and I make no doubt but that other animals dream as well, although we do not obferve any outward effects, or rather there are none others which come fo particularly within our own cognizance as thefe domeftic animals.

foul is educated out of the power of the matter but what was there before, which must be either matter or fome modification of it. And therefore they cannot grant it to be a spiritual fubftance, unless they will affert it to be educed out of nothing. This opinion, I fay, I can hardly digeft; I fhould rather think animals to be endued with a lower degree of reafon, than that they are mere machines. I could inftance in many actions of brutes that are hardly to be accounted for without reafon and argumentation; as that cominonly noted of dogs, that running before their mafter they will stop at a divarication of the way, till they fee which hand their mafters will take; and that when they have gotten a prey which they fear their mafters will take from them, they will run away and hide it, and afterwards return to it. What account can be given why a dog being to leap upon a table, which he fees too high for him to reach at once, if a stool or chair happens to be near it, doth firft mount up that, and from thence to thatable? If he were a machine or piece of clock-work, and this motion caufed by the ftriking of a fpring, there is no reason imaginable why tlie fpring being fet on work, fhould not carry the machine in a right line toward the object that put it in motion, as well when the table is high as when it was low; whereas I have often obferved the firft leap the creature hath taken up the ftool, not to be directly toward the table, but in a line oblique, and much declining from the object that moved it, or that part of the table on which it flood. Many the like actions there are which I fhall not spend time to relate. Should this be true, that beafts were automata or machines, they could have no fenfe or perception of pleasure or pain, and confequently no cruelty could be exercifed towards them, which is contrary to the doleful fignification they make when beaten or tormented, and contra

naturally pitying them, as apprehending them have fuch a fenfe and feeling of pain and mifery as themselves have." Wifd. of God, page 61, & feq. Thus far this great naturalift, which is fufficient to confute the ab furd Cartesian hypothesis.

From all that has been faid it is plain that brute animals possess an internal intelligent principle, which principle must be im-ry to the common fenfe of mankind, all men material, and, if fo, neceffarily immortal. As this is the neceffary confequence of what hath been laid down with regard to the brute creation, many attempts have been made to avoid it by those writers who cannot be brought to believe brutes to be of fuch importance. Some would account for every thing on the principles of mechanifm, in confutation of which I fhall produce the words of the great naturalift already quo

ted.

That the foul of Brutes, faith he, is material, and the whole animal, foul and body, but a mere machine, is the opinion publickly owned and declared of Des Cartes Gaffendus, Dr. Willis, and others; the fame is alfo neceffarily confequent upon the doctrine of the Peripatetics, viz. that the

Others there are who hold they are acted upon by an external reafon, or, as an old fchoolman had expreffed himfelf, with more elegance than truth, Deus eft anima brutorum, "God himself is the foul of brutes ;" but this notion is fhocking to reason, and makes as ftrongly against the immateriality, and immortality, of the foul of man. If God actuates the brute creatures, the fame may be faid of men, that God acts in us; and we are confequently the inftruinents of

the

« ElőzőTovább »